Title: Next-Generation Ntional Nanotechnology Infrastructure Newtwork
(NG NMIN) (nsf13521)
Date: 02/26/13
Next-Generation National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NG NNIN)
[1]Program Solicitation
NSF 13-521
NSF Logo
National Science Foundation
Directorate for Engineering
Directorate for Mathematical & Physical Sciences
Directorate for Computer & Information Science & Engineering
Directorate for Biological Sciences
Directorate for Geosciences
Directorate for Social, Behavioral & Economic Sciences
Directorate for Education & Human Resources
Office of International Science and Engineering
Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's
local time):
April 01, 2013
Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
May 13, 2013
IMPORTANT INFORMATION AND REVISION NOTES
A revised version of the NSF Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures
Guide (PAPPG), [2]NSF 13-1, was issued on October 4, 2012 and is
effective for proposals submitted, or due, on or after January 14,
2013. Please be advised that the guidelines contained in [3]NSF 13-1
apply to proposals submitted in response to this funding opportunity.
Proposers who opt to submit prior to January 14, 2013, must also
follow the guidelines contained in [4]NSF 13-1.
Please be aware that significant changes have been made to the PAPPG
to implement revised merit review criteria based on the National
Science Board (NSB) report, [5]National Science Foundation's Merit
Review Criteria: Review and Revisions. While the two merit review
criteria remain unchanged (Intellectual Merit and Broader Impacts),
guidance has been provided to clarify and improve the function of the
criteria. Changes will affect the project summary and project
description sections of proposals. Annual and final reports also will
be affected.
A by-chapter summary of this and other significant changes is provided
at the beginning of both the [6]Grant Proposal Guide and the [7]Award
& Administration Guide.
Please note that this program solicitation may contain supplemental
proposal preparation guidance and/or guidance that deviates from the
guidelines established in the [8]Grant Proposal Guide.
SUMMARY OF PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
General Information
Program Title:
Next-Generation National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NG
NNIN)
Synopsis of Program:
The National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN) will
reach its ten year authorized award life at the end of Fiscal Year
2013. The National Science Foundation is announcing in this
solicitation an open competition to establish a Next-Generation
National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NG NNIN) for Fiscal
Years 2014-2018.
NNIN has enabled major discoveries, innovations, and contributions
to education and commerce within all disciplines of nanoscale
science, engineering, and technology through NSF support of a
national network of university-based user facilities. These
facilities have provided open access to leading-edge nanotechnology
fabrication and characterization tools, instrumentation, and
expertise for users across the nation from academia, small and
large industry, and government. The core mission of NNIN has
included national-level education and outreach programs to enable a
diverse science and engineering workforce, the study of societal
and ethical implications of nanotechnology including issues of
environment, health, and safety, as well as important modeling and
simulation capabilities.
The new competition for the NG NNIN will build on the concept of
NNIN with a much broadened scope and user base. Support is being
provided by all NSF Directorates and the Office of International
Science and Engineering as an integral part of the NSF investment
in Nanoscale Science and Engineering.
Cognizant Program Officer(s):
Please note that the following information is current at the time of
publishing. See program website for any updates to the points of
contact.
* Lawrence S. Goldberg (Lead), ENG/ECCS, telephone: (703) 292-8339,
email: [9]lgoldber@nsf.gov
* Guebre X. Tessema, MPS/DMR, telephone: (703) 292-4935, email:
[10]gtessema@nsf.gov
* Barbara P. Karn, ENG/CBET, telephone: (703) 292-7949, email:
[11]bkarn@nsf.gov
* Bruce Kramer, ENG/CMMI, telephone: (703) 292-5348, email:
[12]bkramer@nsf.gov
* Zeev Rosenzweig, MPS/CHE, telephone: (703) 292-7719, email:
[13]zrosenzw@nsf.gov
* Sankar Basu, CISE/CCF, telephone: (703) 292-7843, email:
[14]sabasu@nsf.gov
* Sally E. O'Connor, BIO/DBI, telephone: (703) 292-4552, email:
[15]soconnor@nsf.gov
* Frederic M. Kronz, SBE/SES, telephone: (703) 292-7283, email:
[16]fkronz@nsf.gov
* David Lambert, GEO/EAR, telephone: (703) 292-4736, email:
[17]dlambert@nsf.gov
* Duncan E. McBride, EHR/DUE, telephone: (703) 292-4630, email:
[18]dmcbride@nsf.gov
* Graham M. Harrison, OISE, telephone: (703) 292-7252, email:
[19]gharriso@nsf.gov
Applicable Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s):
* 47.041 --- Engineering
* 47.049 --- Mathematical and Physical Sciences
* 47.050 --- Geosciences
* 47.070 --- Computer and Information Science and Engineering
* 47.074 --- Biological Sciences
* 47.075 --- Social Behavioral and Economic Sciences
* 47.076 --- Education and Human Resources
* 47.079 --- Office of International Science and Engineering
Award Information
Anticipated Type of Award: Cooperative Agreement
Estimated Number of Awards: 1
NSF plans to support a single national network.
Anticipated Funding Amount: $16,000,000 Approximately $16,000,000 will
be available annually in this competition to fund the network for each
year of the five-year award duration, subject to the availability of
funds. An award will be in the form of a cooperative agreement made
directly with the lead institution. An individual institution within
the network is limited to receiving a maximum of $2,500,000 per year
for support of its facility. The lead institution may request funds
beyond this limit for coordinated network purposes of management,
outreach, and related activities. The initial award commitment will be
for five years and may be renewed once for an additional five years,
subject to external merit review. Recompetition will be required after
ten years. The size of an award will depend on the plans and
capabilities of the proposed network.
Eligibility Information
Organization Limit:
Proposals may only be submitted by the following:
* U.S. academic institutions are eligible to submit or participate
in proposals for an integrated network of user facilities.
Non-academic U.S. institutions and organizations, including
national laboratories and private-sector companies, as well as
non-U.S. institutions, may participate in network activities using
their own resources.
PI Limit:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
An institution may not be included in more than one proposal
submitted in response to this solicitation.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
None Specified
Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
* Letters of Intent: Submission of Letters of Intent is required.
Please see the full text of this solicitation for further
information.
* Preliminary Proposal Submission: Not Applicable
* Full Proposals:
+ Full Proposals submitted via FastLane: NSF Proposal and Award
Policies and Procedures Guide, Part I: Grant Proposal Guide
(GPG) Guidelines apply. The complete text of the GPG is
available electronically on the NSF website at:
[20]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg.
+ Full Proposals submitted via Grants.gov: NSF Grants.gov
Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission
of NSF Applications via Grants.gov Guidelines apply (Note:
The NSF Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the
Grants.gov website and on the NSF website at:
[21]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gran
tsgovguide)
B. Budgetary Information
* Cost Sharing Requirements: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost
sharing is prohibited.
* Indirect Cost (F&A) Limitations: Not Applicable
* Other Budgetary Limitations: Not Applicable
C. Due Dates
* Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's
local time):
April 01, 2013
* Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
May 13, 2013
Proposal Review Information Criteria
Merit Review Criteria: National Science Board approved criteria.
Additional merit review considerations apply. Please see the full text
of this solicitation for further information.
Award Administration Information
Award Conditions: Additional award conditions apply. Please see the
full text of this solicitation for further information.
Reporting Requirements: Additional reporting requirements apply.
Please see the full text of this solicitation for further information.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
[22]Summary of Program Requirements
I. [23]Introduction
II. [24]Program Description
III. [25]Award Information
IV. [26]Eligibility Information
V. [27]Proposal Preparation and Submission Instructions
A. [28]Proposal Preparation Instructions
B. [29]Budgetary Information
C. [30]Due Dates
D. [31]FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements
VI. [32]NSF Proposal Processing and Review Procedures
A. [33]Merit Review Principles and Criteria
B. [34]Review and Selection Process
VII. [35]Award Administration Information
A. [36]Notification of the Award
B. [37]Award Conditions
C. [38]Reporting Requirements
VIII. [39]Agency Contacts
IX. [40]Other Information
I. INTRODUCTION
The National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network (NNIN) will reach
its ten year authorized award life at the end of Fiscal Year 2013. The
National Science Foundation is announcing in this solicitation an open
competition to establish a Next-Generation National Nanotechnology
Infrastructure Network (NG NNIN) for Fiscal Years 2014-2018.
NNIN has enabled major discoveries, innovations, and contributions to
education and commerce within all disciplines of nanoscale science,
engineering, and technology through NSF support of a national network
of university-based user facilities. These facilities have provided
open access to leading-edge nanotechnology fabrication and
characterization tools, instrumentation, and expertise for users
across the nation from academia, small and large industry, and
government. The core mission of NNIN has included national-level
education and outreach programs to enable a diverse science and
engineering workforce, the study of societal and ethical implications
of nanotechnology including issues of environment, health, and safety,
as well as important modeling and simulation capabilities.
The national investment in nanotechnology through the National
Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI)^([41]1) places an important emphasis
on ensuring an enabling infrastructure for future advancements in the
field. The Congressional Research Service 2012 Report^([42]2) for
Congress on NNI, summarizing 2012 assessments by the President's
Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) and the National
Research Council (NRC), underlines the importance of maintaining and
expanding the nanotechnology infrastructure, including
university-based user facilities such as NNIN. NNIN is a supportive
component of the NNI Federal investment of about $1.7 billion per
year, for which PCAST (2010)^([43]3) has recommended a ten-year vision
for 2011-2020 approved by the President and Congress.
NSF recently convened a Workshop^([44]4) of recognized national
experts to look broadly at the future needs and appropriate
investments for a national infrastructure for nanotechnology. The
workshop examined the opportunities provided by a nanotechnology
infrastructure as well as the needs of the scientific and
technological communities for realization of these opportunities. The
workshop report, noting that the NNI vision anticipates transition
over the next decade from active nanostructures toward systems of
nanosystems, stated that sustained and predictable access to a broad
range of state-of-the-art instrumentation and facilities for
synthesis, processing, fabrication, characterization, modeling, and
analysis of nanomaterials and nanosystems, including bio-nanosystems,
is critically needed to achieve this objective. The workshop report
urged formation of a new infrastructure network that will build on the
concept of NNIN with a much broadened scope and user base.
The new competition is being supported by all NSF Directorates and the
Office of International Science and Engineering as an integral part of
the NSF investment in Nanoscale Science and Engineering.
______________
(1) National Nanotechnology Initiative (NNI), including annual budget
requests to Congress:[45] http://www.nsf.gov/nano
(2) Congressional Research Service, The National Nanotechnology
Initiative: Overview, Reauthorization, and Appropriations Issues, May
22, 2012, Washington, DC:
[46]http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34401.pdf
(3) PCAST, Report to the President and Congress on the Third
Assessment of the National Nanotechnology Initiative, March 2010,
Washington, DC:
[47]http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/microsites/ostp/pcas
t-nano-report.pdf
(4) Nanotechnology Infrastructure Workshop, April 3-4, 2012,
Arlington, VA:[48]
http://www.nsf.gov/eng/eccs/nanotechnology_infrastructure_workshop_rep
ort.pdf
II. PROGRAM DESCRIPTION
The new competition for a Next-Generation National Nanotechnology
Infrastructure Network (NG NNIN) builds upon the attributes sought in
the original NNIN competition.
Original Attributes
The attributes are for a network comprised of both large and small
university-based user facilities, including those at minority-serving
institutions, at sites that are geographically distributed and with
diverse and complementary tools, instruments, and capabilities to
design, create, characterize, and measure novel nanoscale structures,
materials, devices, and systems. These capabilities will be made
available widely to the nation's researchers in academe, small and
large industry, and government for scientific and engineering
experiments and to stimulate technological innovation. The network
will encompass the full spectrum of science and engineering that spans
the scale from the nano to the micro domain. The network will have the
flexibility to grow or reconfigure as needs arise; the culture of
open-access facilities for any research project of merit; the
fostering of research, education, and outreach in diverse fields; the
necessary investments in capital equipment, processes, tools, and
instrumentation; and the expert staffing needed for such a role.
Equally important is provision of the infrastructure for education,
training, and workforce development in nanoscale science, engineering,
and technology at all levels, including K-12, technician,
undergraduate, graduate, and post graduate; and for outreach programs
to reach potential users in the broader science and engineering
communities whose work could benefit from advanced fabrication and
instrumentation capabilities. The network should develop connections
with other nationally funded academic centers in nanoscale science and
engineering, and with facilities supported by other Federal agencies,
State governments, the private sector, and non-U.S. institutions.
Successful application and development of nanotechnology will require
careful consideration and analysis of associated social and ethical
implications. The network should incorporate opportunities for
research and related activities on these aspects.
Proposing institutions are encouraged to include the broadest range of
capabilities in their network proposal. The network should provide
users access not only to the specialized tools, processes, and
expertise for designing, simulating, and fabricating nano- and
micro-scale structures, materials, devices, and systems, but also to
the specialized instrumentation for analysis, characterization,
probing, and manipulation of objects at these dimensions. The network
should encompass capabilities for determining fundamental physical,
chemical, and biological properties; for metrology, characterization,
probing, manipulation, and control; for design, modeling, and
simulation; for patterning, processing, fabrication, and integration;
and for other special needs. The individual sites may focus on
particular subfields; however, the overall network should comprise
facilities and instrumentation addressing needs across the broad
science and engineering domains, including: physical-, chemical-, and
biological-based nanostructures, materials, devices, and systems;
nanoscale building blocks and nanostructured materials, composites,
coatings, and surfaces; electronic, optical/photonic, magnetic,
mechanical, thermal, and fluidic nanodevices and systems; geophysical,
geochemical, and environmental nanostructures and processes;
bioengineering and biomedical nanodevices and systems; process
integration technologies, prototyping, and testing of manufacturing
concepts; and other areas, as appropriate. Sites should have
appropriate existing equipment base, materials and processes, tools
and instrumentation. They should also have plans for acquisition,
where appropriate, of new tools, instrumentation, processes, and
supporting technologies that will position and maintain their
facilities at the frontier.
Broadened Scope
The infrastructure of the NG NNIN will also incorporate the following
major elements identified in the Nanotechnology Infrastructure
Workshop report^(4) to offer a much broadened scope and user base:
* Emphasis on utilization of the network nature of the program to
provide value to the user community far greater than individual
components.
* A user base that is broadened to include communities such as
environmental sciences, geosciences, and biosciences.
* Availability of new leading-edge fabrication capability to users
who require it.
* Capabilities to create complex and three-dimensional nanoscale
systems through heterogeneous integration.
* Capabilities to build nanoscale systems across multiple
dimensional scales through hierarchical design and fabrication.
* Capabilities for fabrication in soft matter including potentially
biological interfaces.
* New generations of modeling and simulation along with the use of
new design tools to maximize overall understanding and fabrication
efficiency.
* Facilities capable of supporting the translation of discovery into
prototypical elements suitable for evaluation of manufacturability
and proof of business concept.
* Partnerships with industry, government, and other groups to
provide specialized capabilities within the network when
warranted, including linkages with other networks and federal
infrastructure investments.
* Unified program of education and outreach built upon the unique
nature of the network and funded at a level commensurate with the
goals and directions of the program.
* Commitment to support and champion environmental responsibility,
health, and safety (EHS) by providing direct capabilities
including characterization, fabrication, and synthesis as well as
establishment of the benchmark for EHS within a university
environment.
* Incorporation of understanding of societal and ethical
implications (SEI) of nanotechnology.
Considerations for Individual Sites in the Network
The individual user facility sites will have considerable autonomy in
their operation, management, and oversight as part of the overall
network. Each institution will provide the necessary infrastructure,
including appropriate laboratory, clean room, and common space and
sharing of equipment, in support of an external user community. The
facilities must embrace a culture of open access to qualified
researchers, with protection of intellectual property, and mechanisms
for encouraging non-traditional users from diverse disciplines. They
should have an organizational structure that allows coordination of
complex process steps and tools for integrated tasks, and acceptance
of experimental risks associated with non-standard processes and
materials. They should have strong underlying internal research
programs that provide critical research mass and knowledge base in
developing new processes, methodologies, and instrumentation. They
should emphasize advanced educational opportunities for graduate and
undergraduate students, technicians, postdoctoral associates,
scientists, and engineers across a broad spectrum of disciplines. They
should also have a technical staff with requisite expertise to serve
external and internal users and to instruct in laboratory safety,
process methods, and instrumentation usage. Some sites should support
exploration of the social and ethical implications of nanotechnology.
Coordinating Features of the Network
It is desired that the network have the following coordinating
features:
* Appropriate mixture of geographically-distributed large and small
facilities that provide diverse and complementary capabilities to
support current and anticipated user needs for nano- and
micro-scale fabrication and characterization across a broad
spectrum of science, engineering, and technology domains.
* Effective management structure and comprehensive website to ensure
close linkage and cooperation among the individual facilities such
that they operate as a cohesive national network.
* Seamless methods of network operation that support complex user
projects across facilities and remote users of facilities.
* Simulation and modeling computational tools appropriate to design
and fabrication of nanoscale structures and systems, and effective
coordination with the Network for Computational Nanotechnology
(NCN).
* Coordination of national-level education and outreach programs
across the network, with a comprehensive assessment mechanism.
* Coordination of instruction and study of social and ethical
implications of nanotechnology across the network that leverages
its user community base.
* Dissemination of shared knowledge to research and development
communities.
* Promotion of diversity and broadening participation among
students, faculty, staff, management, and outreach activities.
* Appropriate user fee structures at all sites for academic,
industry, government, international, and other researchers.
* Connections with other nationally funded academic research and
education centers and networks in nanoscale science and
engineering, and with facilities supported by other Federal
agencies, State governments, the private sector, and non-U.S.
institutions.
* Methods for assessment and quantifiable metrics of network
performance and impact.
* Mechanisms to encourage non-traditional users from diverse
disciplines.
* Planning process to accommodate emerging areas of nanoscale
science, engineering, and technology and future growth of external
and internal user base, including adding new sites to, or dropping
existing sites from, the network.
* Establishing an external advisory board of distinguished members
from academia, industry, and government to provide advice and
guidance to network management.
* Fostering additional support from non-NSF sources, including other
Federal agencies, State governments, and the private sector.
Network Director and Site Directors
The network of user facilities will have a Network Director who will
provide intellectual leadership for the network, be responsible for
management and coordination of the activities of the network in a
cohesive manner, and serve as the principal contact person on behalf
of the network with the NSF. The Network Director shall be the
Principal Investigator (PI) of the lead institution submitting the
network proposal. The Network Director will be the key individual for
developing strategies and operational plans for the network in
cooperation with the Site Directors of the individual facilities and
in consultation with an external advisory body of distinguished
scientists and engineers. The Network Director will also coordinate
annual review meetings with the NSF, and will serve as principal
liaison with the outside communities for the promotion of the network.
Individuals designated as Site Directors from the participating
institutions will be responsible for local management functions of the
individual user facilities, for interfacing with other facilities in
the network and with the outside communities, and will serve on the
management team for the overall network.
III. AWARD INFORMATION
NSF plans to support a single national network. Approximately
$16,000,000 will be available annually in this competition to fund the
network for each year of the five-year award duration, subject to the
availability of funds. An award will be in the form of a cooperative
agreement made directly with the lead institution. An individual
institution within the network is limited to receiving a maximum of
$2,500,000 per year for support of its facility. The lead institution
may request funds beyond this limit for coordinated network purposes
of management, outreach, and related activities. The initial award
commitment will be for five years and may be renewed once for an
additional five years, subject to external merit review. Recompetition
will be required after ten years. The size of an award will depend on
the plans and capabilities of the proposed network.
IV. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION
Organization Limit:
Proposals may only be submitted by the following:
* U.S. academic institutions are eligible to submit or participate
in proposals for an integrated network of user facilities.
Non-academic U.S. institutions and organizations, including
national laboratories and private-sector companies, as well as
non-U.S. institutions, may participate in network activities using
their own resources.
PI Limit:
None Specified
Limit on Number of Proposals per Organization:
An institution may not be included in more than one proposal
submitted in response to this solicitation.
Limit on Number of Proposals per PI:
None Specified
V. PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION INSTRUCTIONS
A. Proposal Preparation Instructions
Letters of Intent(required):
For NSF planning purposes, a non-binding letter of intent to submit a
network proposal to this solicitation must be sent by the date listed
at the beginning of this solicitation. The letter of intent (in clear
text, 2-page limit, with no attachments) should list the project
title, PI/Network Director, lead institution, and other participating
institutions, including designation of the respective Site Directors.
Provide a brief summary discussion of the proposed network and of the
funds to be requested.
Letter of Intent Preparation Instructions:
When submitting a Letter of Intent through FastLane in response to
this Program Solicitation please note the conditions outlined below:
* Sponsored Projects Office (SPO) Submission is not required when
submitting Letters of Intent
* Submission of multiple Letters of Intent is not allowed
Full Proposal Preparation Instructions: Proposers may opt to submit
proposals in response to this Program Solicitation via Grants.gov or
via the NSF FastLane system.
* Full proposals submitted via FastLane: Proposals submitted in
response to this program solicitation should be prepared and
submitted in accordance with the general guidelines contained in
the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG). The complete text of the GPG
is available electronically on the NSF website at:
[49]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg.
Paper copies of the GPG may be obtained from the NSF Publications
Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from
[50]nsfpubs@nsf.gov. Proposers are reminded to identify this
program solicitation number in the program solicitation block on
the NSF Cover Sheet For Proposal to the National Science
Foundation. Compliance with this requirement is critical to
determining the relevant proposal processing guidelines. Failure
to submit this information may delay processing.
* Full proposals submitted via Grants.gov: Proposals submitted in
response to this program solicitation via Grants.gov should be
prepared and submitted in accordance with the NSF Grants.gov
Application Guide: A Guide for the Preparation and Submission of
NSF Applications via Grants.gov. The complete text of the NSF
Grants.gov Application Guide is available on the Grants.gov
website and on the NSF website at:
([51]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgo
vguide). To obtain copies of the Application Guide and Application
Forms Package, click on the Apply tab on the Grants.gov site, then
click on the Apply Step 1: Download a Grant Application Package
and Application Instructions link and enter the funding
opportunity number, (the program solicitation number without the
NSF prefix) and press the Download Package button. Paper copies of
the Grants.gov Application Guide also may be obtained from the NSF
Publications Clearinghouse, telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail
from [52]nsfpubs@nsf.gov.
Important Proposal Preparation Information: FastLane will check for
required sections of the proposal, in accordance with Grant Proposal
Guide (GPG) instructions described in Chapter II.C.2. The GPG requires
submission of: Project Summary; Project Description; References Cited;
Biographical Sketch(es); Budget; Budget Justification; Current and
Pending Support; Facilities, Equipment & Other Resources; Data
Management Plan; and Postdoctoral Mentoring Plan, if applicable. If a
required section is missing, FastLane will not accept the proposal.
Please note that the proposal preparation instructions provided in
this program solicitation may deviate from the GPG instructions. If
the solicitation instructions do not require a GPG-required section to
be included in the proposal, insert text or upload a document in that
section of the proposal that states, "Not Applicable for this Program
Solicitation." Doing so will enable FastLane to accept your proposal.
PROPOSAL CONTENT
Proposals must contain the items listed below and adhere to the
specified page limitations. No additional information may be provided
by links to web pages.
Cover Page: FastLane Users: Proposers must identify this program
solicitation number by selecting "Next-Generation National
Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network" from the Program
Announcement/Solicitation Box, which will automatically populate the
NSF Unit of Consideration with the correct NSF organization and
program. The project title must begin with "NG NNIN:".
Grants.gov Users: The program solicitation number will be
pre-populated by Grants.gov on the NSF Grant Application Cover Page.
In Field 2, Unit of Consideration, enter 07010000 for the Division
Code and 7601 for the Program Code. The project title must begin with
"NG NNIN:".
Project Summary: Provide a summary description of the proposed network
that conveys its objectives and key features in a manner that will be
informative to a general technical audience. As now required in
FastLane, the project summary is limited to 1 page and must address
within separate text boxes the Overview, the Intellectual Merit, and
the Broader Impacts of the proposed activity.
Table of Contents: The Table of Contents is generated by the system
and cannot be edited.
Project Description: The project description section contains the
following items a through h, and is limited to a combined total length
of 35 pages, inclusive of tables, figures, or other graphical data.
a. List of Participants: Provide a listing, organized by institution
and showing departmental affiliation, of the Network Director, Site
Directors, and other faculty members or senior level personnel
expected to have an important management role in the network project.
b. Vision and Goals: Describe the vision and goals for the proposed
network, including its potential in enabling the nation's research and
education infrastructure for nanoscale science, engineering, and
technology, and its broader educational and societal impacts.
c. Capabilities of the Network: Describe the full extent of
fabrication and characterization instrumentation capabilities, the
breadth of coverage of research fields and needs, specifying any areas
that may lack coverage, the nature of user services to be provided,
the mixture of large and small facilities and their geographic
distribution, and the essential criteria required for a facility to be
part of the network. Describe how external users will apply to the
network, how non-traditional users will be encouraged, how projects
will be accepted and assigned into the system, provisions to
accommodate users both on site and remotely, the ability to accomplish
user projects at individual sites or at multiple sites as needed, and
provision for simulation and modeling tools and laboratory software.
Describe the planning and budgeting process for acquisition and
development of new tools and instrumentation needed to position the
facilities at the frontier over the duration of the award. Discuss
plans to provide a broader national infrastructure for nanoscale
science, engineering and technology by developing connections between
the network and other nationally funded academic centers, networks,
and facilities supported by government, the private sector, and
non-U.S. institutions.
d. Capabilities of Individual Sites: For each proposed network site,
describe the strengths, capabilities, disciplinary coverage and focus
of the user facility. Detailed information on facilities, equipment,
and other resources should be provided in Section on Facilities,
Equipment, and Other Resources, below. Describe the in-house research
programs of principal faculty members that underpin the site's
capabilities and that would enable it to support development of new
tools, instrumentation, and processes. Discuss any past experience in
operation as a user facility. Describe the commitment of the
institution to providing appropriate laboratory, clean room, and
common space, faculty and staff positions, capital equipment and
instrumentation, and their maintenance and operation. Describe plans
for staffing, accommodating external users, encouraging
non-traditional users, user training, user fee structure, intellectual
property policy, education, and outreach.
e. Education, Outreach, and Knowledge Dissemination: Describe how
advanced educational experiences of graduate and undergraduate
students, postdoctoral associates, and others will be emphasized
within the facilities. Discuss the role of diversity and broadening
participation in plans to attract high-quality U.S. students,
especially women, racial and ethnic minorities who are members of
groups underrepresented in science and engineering, and persons with
disabilities. Describe educational outreach plans, including those to
community colleges, minority-serving institutions, K-12 teachers and
schools, and the broader community. Any planned activities such as
research experiences for undergraduates, including international
aspects, and research experiences for teachers should be built in as
part of the proposal. Describe outreach plans intended to increase the
external user base, to encourage non-traditional users from diverse
communities or those without access to advanced tools and
instrumentation, and to foster emerging areas for the field. Describe
provisions for knowledge dissemination to the broader research and
technology communities. Describe plans for a comprehensive assessment
mechanism.
f. Social and Ethical Implications: Describe plans for coordination of
instruction and study of social and ethical implications of
nanotechnology across the network that leverages its user community
base. List the issues that will be core concerns; describe
methodologies likely to be used to investigate these concerns; and
indicate local researchers likely to be involved in the exploration of
these issues. Describe plans to facilitate more broadly cooperation
and interchange between scientists and engineers in
nanoscience-related fields and social scientists and ethicists
studying nanotechnology.
g. Management: Describe the management structure for the network and
for the individual sites in the network. Discuss the method of
selection, tenure, and responsibilities of the Network Director,
individual Site Directors, and other management individuals. Describe
provisions for network oversight, including external advisory bodies,
their composition, responsibilities, and means of advising network
management. Describe the methods for managing the external users
program and for integrating the network's activities into academic
programs. Discuss the planning process to determine overall network
requirements, including the development of a vision for future
nanoscale science and engineering research directions, needs, and
capabilities; procedures for adding new sites to, or for dropping
existing sites from, the network; allocation of resources; and
prioritization of equipment acquisition, development, and staffing.
Describe methods for assessment and quantifiable metrics of network
performance and impact. Describe the processes for setting goals,
including promoting significant participation of non-traditional users
and external users at all facilities.
h. Broader Impacts: Discuss the broader impacts of the proposed
national network of nanotechnology user facilities.
References Cited: Provide appropriate references.
Biographical Sketches (2-page limit each for PI, co-PIs, and Site
Directors;1-page limit each for other senior personnel): Provide a
biographical sketch for each participant listed above. The sketch
should describe the individual's academic and professional history and
may list five significant publications and other activities or
accomplishments. In choosing what to include, emphasize information
that will be helpful in understanding the strengths, qualifications,
and specific impact the individual brings to the network project.
Budget: The lead institution shall submit the proposal. Other
participating institutions will be supported through subawards from
the lead institution. Provide annual budgets for each year of five
years for the overall network, as well as individual budgets for all
participating institutions that receive a subaward. The system will
automatically fill out the cumulative five-year budget. An individual
institution within the network is limited to receiving a maximum of
$2.5 million per year for support of its facility. The lead
institution may, however, request funds beyond this limit for
coordinated network purposes of management, outreach, and other
activities. The major portion of NSF funds should be budgeted for
operation and staffing of the user facilities and associated network
activities. NSF funds may also be budgeted, as appropriate, for
acquisition of, and to support the in-house development of, major
instrumentation, tools, processes, and special-purchase laboratory
software. NSF funds may not be budgeted for research purposes, with
the exception of societal and ethical implications studies.
Budget Justification (3-page limit, each): Provide a justification for
the funds requested in the major budget categories for the overall
network and for each individual institution participating in the
network. Describe the proposed allocation of funds with sufficient
clarity to show how resources will be utilized in carrying out the
proposed network activities. Describe the planned acquisition or
development of major instrumentation, tools, processes, and
special-purchase laboratory software. For each such item requested in
the first year, include sufficient specificity in description, with
explanation of the need, and any provision for maintenance and
operating expenses.
Current and Pending Support: Provide for PI, co-PIs, and Site
Directors.
Facilities, Equipment and other Resources: Provide an aggregated
description of the internal and external resources, both physical and
personnel, that the organization and its collaborators will provide to
the project that will enable an assessment of the adequacy to perform
the proposed effort. Such information must be provided in this
section, in lieu of other parts of the proposal. The description
should be narrative in nature and must not include any quantifiable
financial information. Describe the distinguishing fabrication and/or
characterization tools, instrumentation and processes that are
available, including the ability to accommodate and develop
nonstandard processes and materials. Provide details of existing or
proposed resource commitments from other organizations, such as
government, industry, private foundations, and non-U.S. institutions,
that will contribute to operation of the facilities.
Supplementary Documentation: Submit official supporting letters that
verify resource commitments by each institution participating in the
network and by other organizations.
B. Budgetary Information
Cost Sharing: Inclusion of voluntary committed cost sharing is
prohibited
C. Due Dates
* Letter of Intent Due Date(s) (required) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's
local time):
April 01, 2013
* Full Proposal Deadline(s) (due by 5 p.m. proposer's local time):
May 13, 2013
D. FastLane/Grants.gov Requirements
* For Proposals Submitted Via FastLane:
Detailed technical instructions regarding the technical aspects of
preparation and submission via FastLane are available at:
[53]https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm. For FastLane user
support, call the FastLane Help Desk at 1-800-673-6188 or e-mail
[54]fastlane@nsf.gov. The FastLane Help Desk answers general
technical questions related to the use of the FastLane system.
Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be
referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section
VIII of this funding opportunity.
Submission of Electronically Signed Cover Sheets. The Authorized
Organizational Representative (AOR) must electronically sign the
proposal Cover Sheet to submit the required proposal
certifications (see Chapter II, Section C of the Grant Proposal
Guide for a listing of the certifications). The AOR must provide
the required electronic certifications within five working days
following the electronic submission of the proposal. Further
instructions regarding this process are available on the FastLane
Website at: [55]https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.jsp.
* For Proposals Submitted Via Grants.gov:
Before using Grants.gov for the first time, each organization must
register to create an institutional profile. Once registered, the
applicant's organization can then apply for any federal grant on
the Grants.gov website. Comprehensive information about using
Grants.gov is available on the Grants.gov Applicant Resources
webpage: [56]http://www07.grants.gov/applicants/app_help_reso.jsp.
In addition, the NSF Grants.gov Application Guide provides
additional technical guidance regarding preparation of proposals
via Grants.gov. For Grants.gov user support, contact the
Grants.gov Contact Center at 1-800-518-4726 or by email:
[57]support@grants.gov. The Grants.gov Contact Center answers
general technical questions related to the use of Grants.gov.
Specific questions related to this program solicitation should be
referred to the NSF program staff contact(s) listed in Section
VIII of this solicitation.
Submitting the Proposal: Once all documents have been completed,
the Authorized Organizational Representative (AOR) must submit the
application to Grants.gov and verify the desired funding
opportunity and agency to which the application is submitted. The
AOR must then sign and submit the application to Grants.gov. The
completed application will be transferred to the NSF FastLane
system for further processing.
VI. NSF PROPOSAL PROCESSING AND REVIEW PROCEDURES
Proposals received by NSF are assigned to the appropriate NSF program
for acknowledgement and, if they meet NSF requirements, for review.
All proposals are carefully reviewed by a scientist, engineer, or
educator serving as an NSF Program Officer, and usually by three to
ten other persons outside NSF either as ad hoc reviewers, panelists,
or both, who are experts in the particular fields represented by the
proposal. These reviewers are selected by Program Officers charged
with oversight of the review process. Proposers are invited to suggest
names of persons they believe are especially well qualified to review
the proposal and/or persons they would prefer not review the proposal.
These suggestions may serve as one source in the reviewer selection
process at the Program Officer's discretion. Submission of such names,
however, is optional. Care is taken to ensure that reviewers have no
conflicts of interest with the proposal. In addition, Program Officers
may obtain comments from site visits before recommending final action
on proposals. Senior NSF staff further review recommendations for
awards. A flowchart that depicts the entire NSF proposal and award
process (and associated timeline) is included in the GPG as
[58]Exhibit III-1.
A comprehensive description of the Foundation's merit review process
is available on the NSF website at:
[59]http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/meritreview/.
Proposers should also be aware of core strategies that are essential
to the fulfillment of NSF's mission, as articulated in [60]Empowering
the Nation Through Discovery and Innovation: NSF Strategic Plan for
Fiscal Years (FY) 2011-2016. These strategies are integrated in the
program planning and implementation process, of which proposal review
is one part. NSF's mission is particularly well-implemented through
the integration of research and education and broadening participation
in NSF programs, projects, and activities.
One of the core strategies in support of NSF's mission is to foster
integration of research and education through the programs, projects
and activities it supports at academic and research institutions.
These institutions provide abundant opportunities where individuals
may concurrently assume responsibilities as researchers, educators,
and students, and where all can engage in joint efforts that infuse
education with the excitement of discovery and enrich research through
the variety of learning perspectives.
Another core strategy in support of NSF's mission is broadening
opportunities and expanding participation of groups, institutions, and
geographic regions that are underrepresented in STEM disciplines,
which is essential to the health and vitality of science and
engineering. NSF is committed to this principle of diversity and deems
it central to the programs, projects, and activities it considers and
supports.
A. Merit Review Principles and Criteria
The National Science Foundation strives to invest in a robust and
diverse portfolio of projects that creates new knowledge and enables
breakthroughs in understanding across all areas of science and
engineering research and education. To identify which projects to
support, NSF relies on a merit review process that incorporates
consideration of both the technical aspects of a proposed project and
its potential to contribute more broadly to advancing NSF's mission
"to promote the progress of science; to advance the national health,
prosperity, and welfare; to secure the national defense; and for other
purposes." NSF makes every effort to conduct a fair, competitive,
transparent merit review process for the selection of projects.
1. Merit Review Principles
These principles are to be given due diligence by PIs and
organizations when preparing proposals and managing projects, by
reviewers when reading and evaluating proposals, and by NSF program
staff when determining whether or not to recommend proposals for
funding and while overseeing awards. Given that NSF is the primary
federal agency charged with nurturing and supporting excellence in
basic research and education, the following three principles apply:
* All NSF projects should be of the highest quality and have the
potential to advance, if not transform, the frontiers of
knowledge.
* NSF projects, in the aggregate, should contribute more broadly to
achieving societal goals. These "Broader Impacts" may be
accomplished through the research itself, through activities that
are directly related to specific research projects, or through
activities that are supported by, but are complementary to, the
project. The project activities may be based on previously
established and/or innovative methods and approaches, but in
either case must be well justified.
* Meaningful assessment and evaluation of NSF funded projects should
be based on appropriate metrics, keeping in mind the likely
correlation between the effect of broader impacts and the
resources provided to implement projects. If the size of the
activity is limited, evaluation of that activity in isolation is
not likely to be meaningful. Thus, assessing the effectiveness of
these activities may best be done at a higher, more aggregated,
level than the individual project.
With respect to the third principle, even if assessment of Broader
Impacts outcomes for particular projects is done at an aggregated
level, PIs are expected to be accountable for carrying out the
activities described in the funded project. Thus, individual projects
should include clearly stated goals, specific descriptions of the
activities that the PI intends to do, and a plan in place to document
the outputs of those activities.
These three merit review principles provide the basis for the merit
review criteria, as well as a context within which the users of the
criteria can better understand their intent.
2. Merit Review Criteria
All NSF proposals are evaluated through use of the two National
Science Board approved merit review criteria. In some instances,
however, NSF will employ additional criteria as required to highlight
the specific objectives of certain programs and activities.
The two merit review criteria are listed below. Both criteria are to
be given full consideration during the review and decision-making
processes; each criterion is necessary but neither, by itself, is
sufficient. Therefore, proposers must fully address both criteria.
([61]GPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i. contains additional information for use
by proposers in development of the Project Description section of the
proposal.) Reviewers are strongly encouraged to review the criteria,
including [62]GPG Chapter II.C.2.d.i., prior to the review of a
proposal.
When evaluating NSF proposals, reviewers will be asked to consider
what the proposers want to do, why they want to do it, how they plan
to do it, how they will know if they succeed, and what benefits could
accrue if the project is successful. These issues apply both to the
technical aspects of the proposal and the way in which the project may
make broader contributions. To that end, reviewers will be asked to
evaluate all proposals against two criteria:
* Intellectual Merit: The Intellectual Merit criterion encompasses
the potential to advance knowledge; and
* Broader Impacts: The Broader Impacts criterion encompasses the
potential to benefit society and contribute to the achievement of
specific, desired societal outcomes.
The following elements should be considered in the review for both
criteria:
1. What is the potential for the proposed activity to
a. Advance knowledge and understanding within its own field or
across different fields (Intellectual Merit); and
b. Benefit society or advance desired societal outcomes (Broader
Impacts)?
2. To what extent do the proposed activities suggest and explore
creative, original, or potentially transformative concepts?
3. Is the plan for carrying out the proposed activities
well-reasoned, well-organized, and based on a sound rationale?
Does the plan incorporate a mechanism to assess success?
4. How well qualified is the individual, team, or organization to
conduct the proposed activities?
5. Are there adequate resources available to the PI (either at the
home organization or through collaborations) to carry out the
proposed activities?
Broader impacts may be accomplished through the research itself,
through the activities that are directly related to specific research
projects, or through activities that are supported by, but are
complementary to, the project. NSF values the advancement of
scientific knowledge and activities that contribute to achievement of
societally relevant outcomes. Such outcomes include, but are not
limited to: full participation of women, persons with disabilities,
and underrepresented minorities in science, technology, engineering,
and mathematics (STEM); improved STEM education and educator
development at any level; increased public scientific literacy and
public engagement with science and technology; improved well-being of
individuals in society; development of a diverse, globally competitive
STEM workforce; increased partnerships between academia, industry, and
others; improved national security; increased economic competitiveness
of the United States; and enhanced infrastructure for research and
education.
Proposers are reminded that reviewers will also be asked to review the
Data Management Plan and the Postdoctoral Researcher Mentoring Plan,
as appropriate.
Additional Solicitation Specific Review Criteria
In responding to the above NSF review criteria, reviewers will be
asked to place emphasis on the following additional criteria:
* Effectiveness in enhancing the national infrastructure for
nanoscale science, engineering, and technology.
* Degree to which the infrastructure incorporates the major elements
identified to offer a much broadened scope and user base.
* Quality of the network structure and individual sites in providing
diverse and complementary fabrication, characterization,
instrumentation, and infrastructure capabilities on a national
level.
* Quality of advanced educational experiences afforded, and
attention to diversity issues.
* Quality and appropriateness of educational and scientific outreach
and knowledge dissemination programs.
* Quality and appropriateness of plans for studying the social and
ethical implications of nanotechnology.
* Strength of supportive in-house research programs and faculty at
each site.
* Effectiveness of management structure, plans, and ability to
coordinate and ensure high-quality user services across all sites.
* Appropriateness of plans for assessment and metrics of network
performance and impact, and for determining future needs.
* Appropriateness of the budget for the proposed network.
B. Review and Selection Process
Proposals submitted in response to this program solicitation will be
reviewed by a combination of mail and panel review followed by reverse
site review.
A working group of program officers from the participating
Directorates/Divisions/Offices, coordinated by ENG/ECCS, will jointly
oversee all aspects of the NG NNIN program, including the review and
award recommendation process, development of cooperative agreements,
and post-award oversight.
Reviewers will be asked to formulate a recommendation to either
support or decline each proposal. The Program Officer assigned to
manage the proposal's review will consider the advice of reviewers and
will formulate a recommendation.
After scientific, technical and programmatic review and consideration
of appropriate factors, the NSF Program Officer recommends to the
cognizant Division Director whether the proposal should be declined or
recommended for award. NSF is striving to be able to tell applicants
whether their proposals have been declined or recommended for funding
within six months. The time interval begins on the deadline or target
date, or receipt date, whichever is later. The interval ends when the
Division Director accepts the Program Officer's recommendation.
A summary rating and accompanying narrative will be completed and
submitted by each reviewer. In all cases, reviews are treated as
confidential documents. Verbatim copies of reviews, excluding the
names of the reviewers, are sent to the Principal Investigator/Project
Director by the Program Officer. In addition, the proposer will
receive an explanation of the decision to award or decline funding.
In all cases, after programmatic approval has been obtained, the
proposals recommended for funding will be forwarded to the Division of
Grants and Agreements for review of business, financial, and policy
implications and the processing and issuance of a grant or other
agreement. Proposers are cautioned that only a Grants and Agreements
Officer may make commitments, obligations or awards on behalf of NSF
or authorize the expenditure of funds. No commitment on the part of
NSF should be inferred from technical or budgetary discussions with a
NSF Program Officer. A Principal Investigator or organization that
makes financial or personnel commitments in the absence of a grant or
cooperative agreement signed by the NSF Grants and Agreements Officer
does so at their own risk.
VII. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION
A. Notification of the Award
Notification of the award is made to the submitting organization by a
Grants Officer in the Division of Grants and Agreements. Organizations
whose proposals are declined will be advised as promptly as possible
by the cognizant NSF Program administering the program. Verbatim
copies of reviews, not including the identity of the reviewer, will be
provided automatically to the Principal Investigator. (See Section
VI.B. for additional information on the review process.)
B. Award Conditions
An NSF award consists of: (1) the award letter, which includes any
special provisions applicable to the award and any numbered amendments
thereto; (2) the budget, which indicates the amounts, by categories of
expense, on which NSF has based its support (or otherwise communicates
any specific approvals or disapprovals of proposed expenditures); (3)
the proposal referenced in the award letter; (4) the applicable award
conditions, such as Grant General Conditions (GC-1); * or Research
Terms and Conditions * and (5) any announcement or other NSF issuance
that may be incorporated by reference in the award letter. Cooperative
agreements also are administered in accordance with NSF Cooperative
Agreement Financial and Administrative Terms and Conditions (CA-FATC)
and the applicable Programmatic Terms and Conditions. NSF awards are
electronically signed by an NSF Grants and Agreements Officer and
transmitted electronically to the organization via e-mail.
*These documents may be accessed electronically on NSF's Website at
[63]http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF.
Paper copies may be obtained from the NSF Publications Clearinghouse,
telephone (703) 292-7827 or by e-mail from [64]nsfpubs@nsf.gov.
More comprehensive information on NSF Award Conditions and other
important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained
in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available
electronically on the NSF Website at
[65]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.
Special Award Conditions: An award for this solicitation will be made
as a Cooperative Agreement to the lead institution.
C. Reporting Requirements
For all multi-year grants (including both standard and continuing
grants), the Principal Investigator must submit an annual project
report to the cognizant Program Officer at least 90 days prior to the
end of the current budget period. (Some programs or awards require
submission of more frequent project reports). Within 90 days following
expiration of a grant, the PI also is required to submit a final
project report, and a project outcomes report for the general public.
Failure to provide the required annual or final project reports, or
the project outcomes report, will delay NSF review and processing of
any future funding increments as well as any pending proposals for all
identified PIs and co-PIs on a given award. PIs should examine the
formats of the required reports in advance to assure availability of
required data.
PIs are required to use NSF's electronic project-reporting system,
available through Research.gov, for preparation and submission of
annual and final project reports. Such reports provide information on
accomplishments, project participants (individual and organizational),
publications, and other specific products and impacts of the project.
Submission of the report via Research.gov constitutes certification by
the PI that the contents of the report are accurate and complete. The
project outcomes report also must be prepared and submitted using
Research.gov. This report serves as a brief summary, prepared
specifically for the public, of the nature and outcomes of the
project. This report will be posted on the NSF website exactly as it
is submitted by the PI.
More comprehensive information on NSF Reporting Requirements and other
important information on the administration of NSF awards is contained
in the NSF Award & Administration Guide (AAG) Chapter II, available
electronically on the NSF Website at
[66]http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag.
Post-award oversight will consist of an annual site review by a panel
of external experts to be held at one of the network sites. The
awardee will submit a comprehensive annual project report to NSF in
advance of each annual review. The annual project report will contain
a Program Plan and Budget for the next-year's funding increment.
VIII. AGENCY CONTACTS
Please note that the program contact information is current at the
time of publishing. See program website for any updates to the points
of contact.
General inquiries regarding this program should be made to:
* Lawrence S. Goldberg (Lead), ENG/ECCS, telephone: (703) 292-8339,
email: [67]lgoldber@nsf.gov
* Guebre X. Tessema, MPS/DMR, telephone: (703) 292-4935, email:
[68]gtessema@nsf.gov
* Barbara P. Karn, ENG/CBET, telephone: (703) 292-7949, email:
[69]bkarn@nsf.gov
* Bruce Kramer, ENG/CMMI, telephone: (703) 292-5348, email:
[70]bkramer@nsf.gov
* Zeev Rosenzweig, MPS/CHE, telephone: (703) 292-7719, email:
[71]zrosenzw@nsf.gov
* Sankar Basu, CISE/CCF, telephone: (703) 292-7843, email:
[72]sabasu@nsf.gov
* Sally E. O'Connor, BIO/DBI, telephone: (703) 292-4552, email:
[73]soconnor@nsf.gov
* Frederick M. Kronz, SBE/SES, telephone: (703) 292-7283, email:
[74]fkronz@nsf.gov
* David Lambert, GEO/EAR, telephone: (703) 292-4736, email:
[75]dlambert@nsf.gov
* Duncan E. McBride, EHR/DUE, telephone: (703) 292-4630, email:
[76]dmcbride@nsf.gov
* Graham M. Harrison, OISE, telephone: (703) 292-7252, email:
[77]gharriso@nsf.gov
For questions related to the use of FastLane, contact:
* FastLane Help Desk, telephone: 1-800-673-6188; e-mail:
[78]fastlane@nsf.gov.
For questions relating to Grants.gov contact:
* Grants.gov Contact Center: If the Authorized Organizational
Representatives (AOR) has not received a confirmation message from
Grants.gov within 48 hours of submission of application, please
contact via telephone: 1-800-518-4726; e-mail:
[79]support@grants.gov.
IX. OTHER INFORMATION
The NSF Website provides the most comprehensive source of information
on NSF Directorates (including contact information), programs and
funding opportunities. Use of this Website by potential proposers is
strongly encouraged. In addition, National Science Foundation Update
is a free e-mail subscription service designed to keep potential
proposers and other interested parties apprised of new NSF funding
opportunities and publications, important changes in proposal and
award policies and procedures, and upcoming NSF Regional Grants
Conferences. Subscribers are informed through e-mail when new
publications are issued that match their identified interests. Users
can subscribe to this service by clicking the "Get NSF Updates by
Email" link on the [80]NSF web site.
Grants.gov provides an additional electronic capability to search for
Federal government-wide grant opportunities. NSF funding opportunities
may be accessed via this new mechanism. Further information on
Grants.gov may be obtained at [81]http://www.grants.gov.
ABOUT THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
The National Science Foundation (NSF) is an independent Federal agency
created by the National Science Foundation Act of 1950, as amended (42
USC 1861-75). The Act states the purpose of the NSF is "to promote the
progress of science; [and] to advance the national health, prosperity,
and welfare by supporting research and education in all fields of
science and engineering."
NSF funds research and education in most fields of science and
engineering. It does this through grants and cooperative agreements to
more than 2,000 colleges, universities, K-12 school systems,
businesses, informal science organizations and other research
organizations throughout the US. The Foundation accounts for about
one-fourth of Federal support to academic institutions for basic
research.
NSF receives approximately 55,000 proposals each year for research,
education and training projects, of which approximately 11,000 are
funded. In addition, the Foundation receives several thousand
applications for graduate and postdoctoral fellowships. The agency
operates no laboratories itself but does support National Research
Centers, user facilities, certain oceanographic vessels and Arctic and
Antarctic research stations. The Foundation also supports cooperative
research between universities and industry, US participation in
international scientific and engineering efforts, and educational
activities at every academic level.
Facilitation Awards for Scientists and Engineers with Disabilities
provide funding for special assistance or equipment to enable persons
with disabilities to work on NSF-supported projects. See Grant
Proposal Guide Chapter II, Section D.2 for instructions regarding
preparation of these types of proposals.
The National Science Foundation has Telephonic Device for the Deaf
(TDD) and Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) capabilities that
enable individuals with hearing impairments to communicate with the
Foundation about NSF programs, employment or general information. TDD
may be accessed at (703) 292-5090 and (800) 281-8749, FIRS at (800)
877-8339.
The National Science Foundation Information Center may be reached at
(703) 292-5111.
The National Science Foundation promotes and advances scientific
progress in the United States by competitively awarding grants and
cooperative agreements for research and education in the sciences,
mathematics, and engineering.
To get the latest information about program deadlines, to download
copies of NSF publications, and to access abstracts of awards, visit
the NSF Website at [82]http://www.nsf.gov
* Location: 4201 Wilson Blvd.
Arlington, VA 22230
* For General Information
(NSF Information Center): (703) 292-5111
* TDD (for the hearing-impaired): (703) 292-5090
* To Order Publications or Forms:
Send an e-mail to: [83]nsfpubs@nsf.gov
or telephone: (703) 292-7827
* To Locate NSF Employees: (703) 292-5111
PRIVACY ACT AND PUBLIC BURDEN STATEMENTS
The information requested on proposal forms and project reports is
solicited under the authority of the National Science Foundation Act
of 1950, as amended. The information on proposal forms will be used in
connection with the selection of qualified proposals; and project
reports submitted by awardees will be used for program evaluation and
reporting within the Executive Branch and to Congress. The information
requested may be disclosed to qualified reviewers and staff assistants
as part of the proposal review process; to proposer
institutions/grantees to provide or obtain data regarding the proposal
review process, award decisions, or the administration of awards; to
government contractors, experts, volunteers and researchers and
educators as necessary to complete assigned work; to other government
agencies or other entities needing information regarding applicants or
nominees as part of a joint application review process, or in order to
coordinate programs or policy; and to another Federal agency, court,
or party in a court or Federal administrative proceeding if the
government is a party. Information about Principal Investigators may
be added to the Reviewer file and used to select potential candidates
to serve as peer reviewers or advisory committee members. See Systems
of Records, [84]NSF-50, "Principal Investigator/Proposal File and
Associated Records," 69 Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004), and
[85]NSF-51, "Reviewer/Proposal File and Associated Records," 69
Federal Register 26410 (May 12, 2004). Submission of the information
is voluntary. Failure to provide full and complete information,
however, may reduce the possibility of receiving an award.
An agency may not conduct or sponsor, and a person is not required to
respond to, an information collection unless it displays a valid
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) control number. The OMB control
number for this collection is 3145-0058. Public reporting burden for
this collection of information is estimated to average 120 hours per
response, including the time for reviewing instructions. Send comments
regarding the burden estimate and any other aspect of this collection
of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to:
Suzanne H. Plimpton
Reports Clearance Officer
Division of Administrative Services
National Science Foundation
Arlington, VA 22230
[86]Policies and Important Links
|
[87]Privacy | [88]FOIA | [89]Help | [90]Contact NSF | [91]Contact Web
Master | [92]SiteMap
National Science Foundation
The National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington,
Virginia 22230, USA
Tel: (703) 292-5111, FIRS: (800) 877-8339 | TDD: (800) 281-8749
Last Updated:
11/07/06
[93]Text Only
[x.gif]
References
1. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#toc
2. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf13001
3. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf13001
4. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=nsf13001
5. http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/publications/2011/meritreviewcriteria.pdf
6. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/
pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_sigchanges.jsp
7. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/
pappguide/nsf13001/aag_sigchanges.jsp
8. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/
pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_index.jsp
9. mailto:lgoldber@nsf.gov
10. mailto:gtessema@nsf.gov
11. mailto:bkarn@nsf.gov
12. mailto:bkramer@nsf.gov
13. mailto:zrosenzw@nsf.gov
14. mailto:sabasu@nsf.gov
15. mailto:soconnor@nsf.gov
16. mailto:fkronz@nsf.gov
17. mailto:dlambert@nsf.gov
18. mailto:dmcbride@nsf.gov
19. mailto:gharriso@nsf.gov
20. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg
21. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide
22. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#summary
23. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#pgm_intr_txt
24. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#pgm_desc_txt
25. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#awd_info
26. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#elig
27. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#prep
28. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#prep
29. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#budg_cst_shr_txt
30. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#dates
31. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#fastlane
32. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#review
33. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#reviewcrit
34. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#reviewprot
35. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#awardadmin
36. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#awardnotify
37. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#grantcond
38. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#reportreq
39. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#cont
40. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#othpgm
41. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#one
42. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#two
43. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#three
44. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/2013/nsf13521/nsf13521.htm#four
45. http://www.nsf.gov/nano
46. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL34401.pdf
47. http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/
microsites/ostp/pcast-nano-report.pdf
48. http://www.nsf.gov/eng/
eccs/nanotechnology_infrastructure_workshop_report.pdf
49. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=gpg
50. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov
51. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/
pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=grantsgovguide
52. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov
53. https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/a1/newstan.htm
54. mailto:fastlane@nsf.gov
55. https://www.fastlane.nsf.gov/fastlane.jsp
56. http://www07.grants.gov/applicants/app_help_reso.jsp
57. mailto:support@grants.gov
58. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_3ex1.pdf
59. http://www.nsf.gov/bfa/dias/policy/meritreview/
60. http://www.nsf.gov/news/strategicplan/nsfstrategicplan_2011_2016.pdf
61. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_2.jsp#IIC2di
62. http://www.nsf.gov/pubs/policydocs/pappguide/nsf13001/gpg_2.jsp#IIC2di
63. http://www.nsf.gov/awards/managing/award_conditions.jsp?org=NSF
64. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov
65. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag
66. http://www.nsf.gov/publications/pub_summ.jsp?ods_key=aag
67. mailto:lgoldber@nsf.gov
68. mailto:gtessema@nsf.gov
69. mailto:bkarn@nsf.gov
70. mailto:bkramer@nsf.gov
71. mailto:zrosenzw@nsf.gov
72. mailto:sabasu@nsf.gov
73. mailto:soconnor@nsf.gov
74. mailto:fkronz@nsf.gov
75. mailto:dlambert@nsf.gov
76. mailto:dmcbride@nsf.gov
77. mailto:gharriso@nsf.gov
78. mailto:fastlane@nsf.gov
79. mailto:support@grants.gov
80. http://www.nsf.gov/
81. http://www.grants.gov/
82. http://www.nsf.gov/
83. mailto:nsfpubs@nsf.gov
84. http://www.nsf.gov/policies/
SOR_PA_NSF-50_Principal_Investigator_Proposal_File.pdf
85. http://www.nsf.gov/policies/
SOR_PA_NSF-51_Reviewer_Proposal_File.pdf
86. http://www.nsf.gov/policies
87. http://www.nsf.gov/policies/privacy.jsp
88. http://www.nsf.gov/policies/foia.jsp
89. http://www.nsf.gov/help/
90. http://www.nsf.gov/help/contact.jsp
91. mailto:webmaster@nsf.gov
92. http://www.nsf.gov/help/sitemap.jsp
93. http://transcoder.usablenet.com/tt/referrer